Back in my day, only had to remember one set of specs per CPU family and the only variable was the Mhz/Ghz of each model. Now there's exceptions all over the place and some of my most visited links are the CPU lists at Wikipedia and ark.intel.com.

Wow, what a fail. Exactly the same clocks. What is the point of these CPUs? The tick-tock is now completely pointless. Same clocks, same number of cores, and a 10% architecture performance boost? What a waste of money for whoever upgrades from Sandy or Ivy, especially considering a new mobo is needed.

Unfortunately this is AMD's fault. Intel can do whatever they want without competition.

Click to expand...

,,,.... research & re-read and you'll see the benefits. And to all the "PRICERS" who constantly complain about intel prices...If you want a Porsche with Porsche performance you gotta pay Porsche prices,,,, don't worry though hyundai will always make something... almost... just kinda ...sorta like it ....minus the performance, quality and class. Which ever one fits you... go with it

Of course it isn't 100% accurate in all cases. But it is probably accurate in 99% of cases. VT-d is a high level professional feature, and when used in that kind of professional environment people don't overclock. The instability risk isn't worth it. I'm sure there are a few enthusiasts that might like to play around with VT-d, but that isn't what the technology was developed for.

And yes, Sandy Bridge-E is a totally different beast. Every processor can be overclocked on that platform due to the way the platform is designed. That doesn't mean everyone overclocks that use it.

And don't confuse the Extreme edition processor with K series processors. The Extreme Edition processor offer more than just an unlocked multiplier. Professionals do use those processors and don't overclock them. There is no locked equivalent to the 3970X, it is just a flat out bad ass processor. However, there are locked equivalents to the K series processors. There is a 3770 that matches the 3770K, the K is unlocked and the non-K has VT-d.

Back in my day, only had to remember one set of specs per CPU family and the only variable was the Mhz/Ghz of each model. Now there's exceptions all over the place and some of my most visited links are the CPU lists at Wikipedia and ark.intel.com.

Click to expand...

Read my post, the K processors do have VT.

And exactly how far back is "your day"? I mean even going back to 80386 different models had different sets of specs.

Back in my day, only had to remember one set of specs per CPU family and the only variable was the Mhz/Ghz of each model. Now there's exceptions all over the place and some of my most visited links are the CPU lists at Wikipedia and ark.intel.com.

Click to expand...

Well, there is one less variable to consider: all the processors have the same integrated graphics (within 50MHz). Of course, that could mean that all the desktop processors have the GT1 graphics, which would be a shame, but I remain optimistic that they all have the GT2 version.

Of course it isn't 100% accurate in all cases. But it is probably accurate in 99% of cases. VT-d is a high level professional feature, and when used in that kind of professional environment people don't overclock. The instability risk isn't worth it. I'm sure there are a few enthusiasts that might like to play around with VT-d, but that isn't what the technology was developed for.

And yes, Sandy Bridge-E is a totally different beast. Every processor can be overclocked on that platform due to the way the platform is designed. That doesn't mean everyone overclocks that use it.

And don't confuse the Extreme edition processor with K series processors. The Extreme Edition processor offer more than just an unlocked multiplier. Professionals do use those processors and don't overclock them. There is no locked equivalent to the 3970X, it is just a flat out bad ass processor. However, there are locked equivalents to the K series processors. There is a 3770 that matches the 3770K, the K is unlocked and the non-K has VT-d.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you misunderstood what I was trying to say with respect to your earlier post newtekie1.

I was only pointing out that the LGA2011 platform has processors that can OC and have VT-d (3970X, 3960X, 3930K and 3820). The “K” nomenclature is peppered in there as you know. As far as I know all the Sandy Brdige-E processors C2 stepping and above have functional VT-d support in hardware with OC support and that includes the Core i7 3930K.

There aren’t that many “K” processors to begin with. Considering only the most current processor line available (Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge-E) the percentage of K processors that support VT-d is 33.3% or 1/3 (out of the 3930K, 3770K and 3570K). If you consider OCable processors as a metric all the Sandy Bridge-E processors can OC so the percentage there (with Ivy Bridge) with respect to VT-d support would be 60% with VT-d support.

The value of OC + VT-d is up to the individual. I agree that most people who want one of these features doesn’t necessarily care about the other.

Perhaps you misunderstood what I was trying to say with respect to your earlier post newtekie1.

I was only pointing out that the LGA2011 platform has processors that can OC and have VT-d (3970X, 3960X, 3930K and 3820). The “K” nomenclature is peppered in there as you know. As far as I know all the Sandy Brdige-E processors C2 stepping and above have functional VT-d support in hardware with OC support and that includes the Core i7 3930K.

There aren’t that many “K” processors to begin with. Considering only the most current processor line available (Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge-E) the percentage of K processors that support VT-d is 33.3% or 1/3 (out of the 3930K, 3770K and 3570K). If you consider OCable processors as a metric all the Sandy Bridge-E processors can OC so the percentage there (with Ivy Bridge) with respect to VT-d support would be 60% with VT-d support.

The value of OC + VT-d is up to the individual. I agree that most people who want one of these features doesn’t necessarily care about the other.

Click to expand...

But what I'm saying is that the 2011 platform is a totally different beast. Every processor is overclockable. And the processors that do have unlocked multipliers don't have equivalents that are locked. For example, there is no standard 3930, there is only the 3930K. So if someone wants that level of performance, even if they plan to run it at stock, the 3930K is the only option, so including VT-d is a must on that processor. However, on the mainstream platform that isn't the case. There is a 3770 and a 3570, so including VT-d on the K processors isn't necessary. If someone wants VT-d they are going buy the 3770 not the 3770K.

And exactly how far back is "your day"? I mean even going back to 80386 different models had different sets of specs.

Click to expand...

Oh, I know. Whether it's VT/VT-d or just VT-d doesn't change whether I'd ever buy them. I simply found DJ's post the most accurate description of Intel's reasoning. "Fvck you, that's why!" works as an answer to "Why?" 97% percent of the time. The other 3% I actually see a clear reason as to why Intel chose to do what they did.

Oh, I know. Whether it's VT/VT-d or just VT-d doesn't change whether I'd ever buy them. I simply found DJ's post the most accurate description of Intel's reasoning. "Fvck you, that's why!" works as an answer to "Why?" 97% percent of the time. The other 3% I actually see a clear reason as to why Intel chose to do what they did.

Click to expand...

In this case the reasoning is that people buying the K processors are extremely unlikely to ever use VT-d.

if your going to blame someone blame the software and game companies out there that still live in the 90's and refuse to code for 4+ Cores still... yes it's a littler harder to do but damn get with the times it's what NEEDS to be done

Click to expand...

lol, indeed..
when intel release something news or rumor on their upcoming processor line up, i'm just laughing

But what I'm saying is that the 2011 platform is a totally different beast. Every processor is overclockable. And the processors that do have unlocked multipliers don't have equivalents that are locked. For example, there is no standard 3930, there is only the 3930K. So if someone wants that level of performance, even if they plan to run it at stock, the 3930K is the only option, so including VT-d is a must on that processor. However, on the mainstream platform that isn't the case. There is a 3770 and a 3570, so including VT-d on the K processors isn't necessary. If someone wants VT-d they are going buy the 3770 not the 3770K.

Click to expand...

You could always buy a skt 2011 Xeon, the high clocked 6 core variant doesn't cost much more than a 3930K, there are 6 cores under 3930K price point too if I'm not mistaken.

Wow, what a fail. Exactly the same clocks. What is the point of these CPUs? The tick-tock is now completely pointless. Same clocks, same number of cores, and a 10% architecture performance boost? What a waste of money for whoever upgrades from Sandy or Ivy, especially considering a new mobo is needed.

Unfortunately this is AMD's fault. Intel can do whatever they want without competition.

Click to expand...

The core 2 had lower clocks than the pentium 4 and that worked out pretty well. Don't judge on something that hasn't been benched yet. Sandy Bridge was your 5.4L Triton engine. Ivy Bridge added 3v per cylinder. Haswell is your spanking new Coyote 5.0L - Still 8 cylinders, runs at similar RPM's, but much more powerful! AMD would be your 5.3L Chevy.... still using OHV.